Haryana

Ambala

CC/90/2013

PNB - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S DOLPHIN COURIER - Opp.Party(s)

KAVINDER CHAWLA

03 Jul 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

                                                             Complaint Case No. : 90 of 2013

                                                             Date of Institution    : 17.04.2013

                                                             Date of Decision      : 03.07.2017

Punjab National Bank, a Body Corporate Constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertakings Act 5 of 1970), having its Head Office at Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi and a Branch office amongst other places at Army Public School Branch Ambala Cantt. through Sh. Satish Aggarwal its Branch Manager and Principal Officer.  

……Complainant.

Versus

1. M/s Dolphin Courier, 6266/15, Second Floor Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt. through its Manager.  
2. M/s Dolphin Courier, Branch Office Vishwakarma Chwok, Opp. Bari Market Ludhiana through its Manager.  

……Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

BEFORE:   SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

                   MS. ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER.                                  

Present:       Sh. Kavinder Chawla, counsel for the complainant.

                   Sh. Keshav Sharma, counsel for the OPs.                    

ORDER.    

                    In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that Sh. Satish Aggarwal, Branch Manager, authorized person sent one package containing two cheques through the OPs for delivery to Punjab National Bank, Treasury Branch, Ludhiana. It is further submitted that Smt. Simranjot wife of Sh. Sanjay Rehan presented two cheques bearing Nos. 357124 and 357125 for Rs. 167406/- each drawn on State Bank of India Treasury Branch Ludhiana to complainant for collection. The complainant sent the above cheques for collection to Punjab National Bank Treasury Branch Ludhiana and posted to the complainant for collection the above two chequest bearing numbers 357124 and 357125 for Rs. 1,67,406/- each drawn on State Bank of India, Treasury Branch, Ludhiana through the OP No. vide C/N No. 15770 dated 17-10-2011 for delivery to Punjab National Bank Treasury branch Ludhiana. The OPs sent the above package after about four days vide C/N No. 2136 dated 21-10-2011 to OP No. 2 at Ludhiana. The above package was not delivered by the OPs to Punjab National Bank Ludhiana and the complainant wrote letter to OP No. 1 for not delivery of the package to Punjab National Bank, Ludhiana Branch. The OPs failed to deliver the package to Ludhiana branch of Punjab National Bank and also failed to obtain signature of the receiving official at Ludhiana.  The above cheques were fraudulently cashed by some unknown person. Punjab national Bank, RCC Ludhiana informed the complainant at Ambala Cantt that the cheques have not been received by it and as per the POD of OP No. 1 the DAK was delivered to RCC Branch Ludhiana of Punjab National Bank after stamp of RCC without having signature of receiving official. It is further submitted that Smt. Simranjot the drawee of the above cheques lodged a complaint/FIR No. 57 dated 11-02-2012 with Police Station, Ambala Cantt. and also filed a complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act against the complainant and claiming the amount of Rs. 3,34,812/- along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. and damage of Rs. 1,00,000/- besides Rs. 11,000/- as costs of litigation. The said drawee Smt. Simranjot also filed complaint against the complainant with the Banking Ombudsman Branch office Chandigarh. The complainant sent notice dated 05-04-2012 to the OPs and called upon them to pay the cheque amount of Rs. 3,34,812/- along with interest @ 24% p.a. and also pay Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of damages for harassment but in vain. As such, the complainant has prayed that the OPs may kindly be directed to make payment of Rs. 3,34,812/- with interest @ 24% p.a., Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation on account of damages for mental agony and harassment.

2.                Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and tendered reply raising preliminary objection qua maintainability of complaint and suppression of material facts. It is submitted that the documents were handed over by the complainant Bank to OP no. 1 and the same were delivered to Punjab National Bank, Ludhina after putting their stamp on the POD receipt and their Delivery Run Sheet and so much so, the courier Co. the OPs have been doing their business for the last so many years regularly and the same were received back by putting stamp on the delivery Run Sheet as in the present case, hence, there is no any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and the OP No. 1 has sent the entire courier to OP No. 1 for onward delivery to the respective customers and the same were delivered but due to unavoidable reasons. The cheques were encashed by some other person as alleged in Para No. 7 of the complaint. So much so, a police complaint was lodged and an FIR was also registered by Smt. Simranjot, as clearly admitted in para No. 4 of the notice so sent by Mr. Kulwinder Chawla, Advocate on behalf of Punjab national Bank, which is undated and Smt. Simranjot has not been impleaded as a necessary and proper adjudication of the case. The OPs are working as courier and has nothing to do about the contents and neither their business simply they are acting as a courier and if it is having some cheques, drafts, cash etc. then the courier Co. cannot book the packet, but the same was not declared neither got it insured as required and so much so, the packet was deliver to Punjab National Bank, Ludhiana at proper receipt.  Punjab National Bank is nowhere declared the value of the packet, so there is no damage or harassment, as it is nowhere mentioned as to in what manner Punjab national Bank is a consumer, although it is a business and commercial concern for minting huge money in their voluminous business and as such there is no question of payment, as already mentioned above. It is further submitted that the matter is subjudice before the Police Station before the Ombudsman Branch Office, Chandigarh. Rest of the averments made by the complainant are wrong, hence denied.  As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

3.                To prove his version, complainant tendered affidavit of as Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexure C1 to Annexure C-16 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the counsel for the OPs has tendered affidavit as Annexure R1 and documents Annexure R2 to Annexure R5 in the evidence of the OPs and closed the same. 

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file very carefully.  From the above arguments, the following one moot question has arisen for consideration before us are:-

a)       Whether this forum can decide the present complaint through summary procedure or not?

                   The case of the complainant is that the complainant sent one package containing two cheques bearing numbers 357124 and 357125 for Rs. 1,67,406/- each drawn on State Bank of India through the OPs for delivery to Punjab National Bank, Treasury Branch, Ludhiana. But the above package was not delivered by the OPs to Punjab National Bank Ludhiana and the above cheques were fraudulently cashed by some unknown person.

                   On the other hand contention of the opposite party is that the documents were delivered to Punjab National Bank, Ludhina after putting their stamp on the POD receipt and their Delivery Run Sheet.  Counsel for the opposite parties has further contended that the present complainant has also filed a civil suit against the opposite parties as well as against the Canara Bank before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ludhiana on the same ground and the matter is subjudice before the aforesaid Court of Law.

                   At the time of arguments, counsel for the opposite parties has placed the photocopy of civil suit pending before the above Court at Ludhiana, in which next date is mentioned as 24-07-2017 and the said fact is also admitted by the counsel for the complainant.

          Further we have gone through the case law titled as “Babu Singh vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd. 2008 (3) 133”, wherein it is held that the complicated question of fact–summary jurisdiction suspicion of fraud- Dispute about genuineness of signatures of deceased on the proposal form for obtaining policy, eligibility of deceased and close proximity of date of proposal and death-Held that in view of complex factual position matter to be left to be decided by an appropriate forum like Civil Court. The complainant alleged in this complaint that the above said two cheques were belongs to Smt. Simranjot and the same was fraudulently encashed by some unknown person. Smt. Simranjot had filed a complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act and the same was allowed vide order dated 18-11-2014 passed by District Forum, Ambala.  

5.                In view of the aforesaid case law, this Forum is of view that the present complaint cannot be decided through summary procedure as the present case is only can be decided through elaborate evidence. It is admitted fact that the complainant has already exhausted his remedy by way of filing the civil suit before the Civil Court at Ludhiana on the same ground and made the proper parties including opposite parties. Accordingly, the present complaint is, hereby, dismissed being not maintainable.  It is made clear that this order will not affect the case pending before the Civil Court, Ludhiana. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

 

ANNOUNCED ON: 03.07.2017                                     Sd/-

                                                                                (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                     PRESIDENT        

 

                                                                                          Sd/-

                                                                   (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                MEMBER

 

                                                                                    Sd/-

                                                                   (ANAMIKA GUPTA)

                                                                             MEMBER